Spread the love


The Defendant (St. George) got into an argument with the victim, a Mr Durant. During the course of this argument, the Defendant took out a gun and pointed it at Mr Durant. The gun was, in fact, not loaded. He was in any event prevented from taking further action by a third party. The Defendant was prosecuted for assault. It was held by the court that in the circumstances the Defendant was guilty of an assault. Threatening someone with a gun, regardless of whether the gun was loaded, would amount to a threat as long as the victim thought that the gun was in fact loaded. On the other hand, where the victim was aware that the gun was not loaded, but was still afraid, that fear would be unreasonable and therefore there would be no assault in those circumstances. The test applied is subjective, but there must be at least a subjective possibility that the threat against the victim can be carried out.

Hey There, you’re welcome once again to (short for Answer my Questions) blog, you can type the name of any case you’re looking for in the search box below or above as we’ve made summary of many cases available. have a nice time.

See also  Summary of Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

÷ 1 = 7